SEA08LA038 · Hiller UH-12E
Hiller UH-12E · Accident: forced landing while maneuvering
From Yuma, AZ to an unrecorded destination
Event
- NTSB case
- SEA08LA038
- Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
- Accident
- InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
- Completed
- API-reported fatalities
- 0 · all aircraft and ground
- Ground fatalities
- Unknown
- OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
- General aviation
- WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
- Visual Meteorological Cond
Hiller UH-12E
- Aircraft type
- Hiller UH-12
- Category
- Helicopter
- RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
- N104EA
- Operator
- Unknown
- Onboard fatalities
- Unknown
- Route
- From Yuma, AZTo not recorded
- Aircraft age
- Not recorded
- Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
- Part 137: Agricultural
- Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
- Maneuvering · aerial application
- First occurrenceThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
- Forced landing
- DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
- Substantial
Cause areas
- Other maintenance personnel › Maintenance, 100-hour inspection, not followed
- Rotor system, main rotor blade › Fatigue
- Rotor system, main rotor blade › Fractured
Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.
NTSB narrative
While conducting an aerial application flight, the pilot reported that he was initiating a turn over a set of power lines at an altitude of about 60 feet above ground level (agl). As the helicopter crossed over a series of power lines, the pilot heard a "loud pop" and felt an extreme vibration. The pilot maneuvered the helicopter away from the power lines and initiated a forced landing to an open field. He reported that control of the helicopter was "marginal" as the helicopter descended. Shortly before touchdown, the helicopter began to drift (un commanded) to the left and the pilot lowered the collective. The helicopter touched down hard, pivoted to the left and rolled over onto its right side. Post accident examination of the helicopter revealed that a control rotor had separated from the rotor system. The separated control rotor was found in the area where the vibration started. Examination of the control rotor assembly revealed the tubular spar of the blue control rotor was circumferentially fractured at the outboard cuff bolt location. Magnified examinations of the outboard fracture surfaces revealed surface features consistent with fatigue progression in two fronts around the spar. Fatigue initiation locations were identified on opposite sides of one of the outboard bolt holes in the spar. One fatigue origin was identified on the bore surface of the bolt hole and the other was mechanically damaged preventing determination of its exact location. The bore surface was rough and no obvious corrosion was noted in the hole. From the bolt hole the fatigue propagated almost entirely around the spar with very small overstress regions connecting the fatigue to the opposite bolt hole in the spar. No corrosion was noted in the originating bolt hole, however, the exterior surface of the spar exhibited wide spread pitting corrosion and fretting on the faying surfaces with the control rotor cuff. Additional localized corrosion was noted on the interior faying surface of the cuff. Maintenance records indicated that the most recent 100-hour inspection was conducted about 77 hours prior to the accident. The logbook entry associated with the inspection indicated that Airworthiness Directive AD 97-10-16 had been complied with. AD 97-10-16 (effective date 6/26/97) states, in part,: "To prevent separation of the control rotor blade assembly and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter, accomplish the following: (a) Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date of the AD, unless previously accomplished within the last 100 hours TIS, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS from the date of the last inspection, or at the next annual inspection, whichever occurs first, inspect the blade spar tube and cuff for corrosion or cracks, or elongation, corrosion, burrs, pitting or fretting of the bolt holes, and repair, as necessary..."
Probable cause
Fatigue fracture of the control rotor blade spar and failure of maintenance personnel to follow maintenance directives.
Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset
Sources
NTSB record SEA08LA038
- Event ID
- 20071130X01886
- Case number
- SEA08LA038
- Dataset
- historical-pre2008
- Source SHA-256
- 89e2df6d848e7ab3b42e7d7c7a03ff403303057a26ca04c95b3ea67201c3ce74
Source notes (4)
- Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
- Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: local date, investigation status, coordinates. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
- The date is the local date; the NTSB stores the UTC date 2007-11-24.
- API snapshot SHA-256: edbb1338f2ac16f93f6da9df2c7e503b0538bc8f0f4c970cf3eba12efc716b31; retrieved 2026-09-22T03:15:47.203Z.